Skip to main content
Log in

State of the Art of ANCF Elements Regarding Geometric Description, Interpolation Strategies, Definition of Elastic Forces, Validation and the Locking Phenomenon in Comparison with Proposed Beam Finite Elements

  • Published:
Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The focus of the present article lies on new enhanced beam finite element formulations in the absolute nodal coordinate formulation (ANCF) and its embedding in the available formulations in the literature. The ANCF has been developed in the past for the modeling of large deformations in multibody dynamics problems. In contrast to the classical nonlinear beam finite elements in literature, the ANCF does not use rotational degrees of freedom, but slope vectors for the parameterization of the orientation of the cross section. This leads to several advantages compared to the classical formulations, e.g. ANCF elements do not necessarily suffer from singularities emerging from the parameterization of rotations. In the classical large rotation vector formulation, the mass matrix is not constant with respect to the generalized coordinates. In the case of ANCF elements, a constant mass matrix follows, which is advantageous in dynamic analysis. In the standard geometrically exact formulation, the parameterization of rotations leads to a nonlinear term containing quadratic velocities. The so-called quadratic velocity vector vanishes for ANCF elements which is advantageous in dynamic applications. In the present article, existing beam finite element formulations are analyzed and improved to derive formulations which are able to solve industrial applications with high performance, efficiency and accuracy. The interest lies especially on finite element formulations for multibody dynamics systems that are capable of large deformations in order to derive accurate solutions of nonlinear engineering and research problems. Existing shear deformable ANCF beam finite elements show an overly stiff behavior caused by the locking phenomenon. Existing locking problems are discussed in this article and avoided in the proposed elements in order to gain accurate solutions. The state of the art of ANCF elements in literature is reviewed including the basic description of the kinematics, interpolation strategies and definition of elastic forces, but also problems and known disadvantages arising in the existing elements, as e.g. the locking phenomenon. Regarding the description of the elastic forces, the present article shows the two standard approaches in literature as well as new enhanced formulations to avoid locking: a continuum mechanics based formulation for the elastic forces with elimination of Poisson and shear locking, and an extended hybrid structural mechanics based formulation for the elastic forces including a term for penalizing shear and cross section deformation. The definition of the element kinematics and interpolation strategies in existing elements are discussed and compared to the according descriptions of the proposed elements. A comparison of the solution of the proposed finite elements to analytical solutions in the literature and to the solution retrieved from commercial finite element software have shown high accuracy and high order of convergence. The speed of convergence is evaluated regarding different interpolation strategies and different formulations for the elastic forces. The investigations show that the proposed elements have high potential for simulation of geometrically nonlinear problems arising from real-life multibody applications and therefore are highly competitive with existing elements in commercial finite element codes. It has to be mentioned here that most of the studies on nonlinear elements based on the ANCF in literature use linear constitutive laws. Regarding many applications in which geometric and material nonlinearities arise, elastic material models are not sufficient to represent the real problem accurately. For this reason, an extension of the material model is necessary in order to fulfill the requirements of current but also of future materials arising in engineering or research. An overview of existing nonlinear material models in literature can be found in the “Appendix”.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Adams. MSC.Software Corporation, 2 MacArthur Place, Santa Ana, California 92707. www.mscsoftware.com. Accessed 05 Aug 2012

  2. Ambrosio JAC, Nikravesh PE (1992) Elasto-plastic deformations in multibody dynamics. Nonlinear Dyn 3:85104

    Google Scholar 

  3. Antman SS (1994) Nonlinear problems of elasticity. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ashley H (1967) Observation of the dynamic behavior of flexible bodies in orbit. AIAA J 5:460–469

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Bathe K-J (1990) Finite-elemente-methoden. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bauchau OA, Bottasso CL (2001) Contact conditions for cylindrical, prismatic, and screw joints in flexible multibody systems. Multibody Syst Dyn 5:251–278

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Berzeri M, Shabana AA (2000) Development of simple models for the elastic forces in the absolute nodal co-ordinate formulation. J Sound Vib 235(4):539–565

    Google Scholar 

  8. Betsch P (2005) The discrete null space method for the energy consistent integration of constrained mechanical systems: part I: holonomic constraints. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 194:5159–5190

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Betsch P, Leyendecker S (2006) The discrete null space method for the energy consistent integration of constrained mechanical systems: part II: multibody dynamics. Int J Numer Methods Eng 67:499–552

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Betsch P, Steinmann P (2002) Frame-indifferent beam finite elements based upon the geometrically exact beam theory. Int J Numer Methods Eng 54:1775–1788

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Bonet J, Wood RD (1997) Nonlinear continuum mechanics for finite element analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Bremer H, Pfeiffer F (1992) Elastische Mehrkörpersysteme. Teubner-Verlag, Stuttgart

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Craig RR (1981) Structural dynamics: an introduction to computer methods. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  14. Craig RR (2000) Coupling of substructures for dynamic analyses: an overview. AIAA Journal, AIAA Dynamics Specialists Conference, Atlanta, GA, April 5, 2000 (2000–1573)

  15. Craig RR, Bampton MCC (1968) Coupling of substructures for dynamic analyses. AIAA J 6:1313–1319

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Crisfield MA, Jelenić G (1999) Objectivity of strain measures in the geometrically exact three-dimensional beam theory and its finite-element implementation. Proc R Soc Lond A 455:1125–1147

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Dibold M, Gerstmayr J, Irschik H (2007) On the accuracy and computational costs of the absolute nodal coordinate and the floating frame of reference formulation in deformable multibody systems. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2007 international design engineering technical conferences & computers and information in engineering conference IDETC/CIE 2007, September 4–7 2007, Las Vegas, USA, Paper No. DETC2007-34771

  18. Dibold M, Gerstmayr J, Irschik H (2009) A detailed comparison of the absolute nodal coordinate and the floating frame of reference formulation in deformable multibody systems. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn 4:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dill EH (1985) Continuum mechanics: elasticity, plasticity, viscoelasticity. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dmitrochenko O (2005) A new finite element of thin spatial beam in absolute nodal coordinate formulation. In: Proceedings of multibody dynamics, ECCOMAS thematic conference Madrid, Spain, 2005

  21. Dmitrochenko O, Mikkola AM (2011) Digital nomenclature code for topology and kinematics of finite elements based on the absolute nodal co-ordinate formulation. Part K J Multibody Dyn 225(1):34–51

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dmitrochenko O, Pogorelov DY (2003) Generalization of plate finite elements for absolute nodal coordinate formulation. Multibody Syst Dyn 10:17–43

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Dufva KE, Sopanen JT, Mikkola AM (2005) A two-dimensional shear deformable beam element based on the absolute nodal coordinate formulation. J Sound Vib 280:719–738

    Google Scholar 

  24. Eich-Soellner E, Führer C (1998) Numerical methods in multibody dynamics. B.G. Teubner Stuttgart

  25. Eliseev VV (2003) Mechanics of elastic bodies (in Russian). St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University Publishing House, St. Petersburg

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ern A, Guermond JL (2004) Theory and practice of finite elements. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Escalona JL, Hussein HA, Shabana AA (1998) Application of the absolute nodal co-ordinate formulation to multibody system dynamics. J Sound Vibr 214(5):833–851

    Google Scholar 

  28. Euler L (1744) Methodus inveniendi lineas curvas maximi minimive proprietate gaudentes, sive solutio problematis isoperimetrici lattissimo sensu accepti. Marc-Michel Bousquet et Soc, Lausanne

    Google Scholar 

  29. Euler L (1752) Découverte dun nouveau principe de mécanique. Memoires de l’Academie royal des sciences, Bd. 6, Berlin

  30. Frischkorn J, Reese S (2012) A novel solid-beam finite element for the simulation of nitinol stents. In: Proceedings of the ECCOMAS 2012 European congress on computational methods on applied sciences and engineering, Vienna, Austria

  31. Gams M, Planinc I, Saje M (2007) The strain-based beam finite elements in multibody dynamics. J Sound Vib 305:194–210

    Google Scholar 

  32. García-Vallejo D, Mikkola AM, Escalona JL (2007) A new locking-free shear deformable finite element based on absolute nodal coordinates. J Nonlinear Dyn 50:249–264

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. García-Vallejo D, Sugiyama H, Shabana AA (2005) Finite element analysis of the geometric stiffening effect. Part 2: Non-linear elasticity. IMechE J Multi-Body Dyn 219:203–211

    Google Scholar 

  34. García-Vallejo D, Valverde J, Dominguez J (2005) An internal damping model for the absolute nodal coordinate formulation. Nonlinear Dyn 42:347–369

    Google Scholar 

  35. Géradin M, Cardano A (2001) Flexible multibody dynamics: a finite element approach. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  36. Géradin M, Robert G, Bernardin C (1984) Dynamic modelling of manipulators with flexible members. In: Danthine A, Géradin M (eds) Advanced software in robotics. Society of Experimental Mechanics Inc., Elsevier Science Pub. Co

  37. Gerstmayr J (2001) A solution strategy for elasto-plastic multibody systems and related problems. Ph.D. Thesis, Johannes Kepler University Linz

  38. Gerstmayr J (2009) Hotint—A C++ environment for the simulation of multibody dynamics systems and finite elements. In: Multibody dynamics, (2009) ECCOMAS conference. Warsaw, Poland

  39. Gerstmayr J, Ambrósio JAC (2008) Component mode synthesis with constant mass and stiffness matrices applied to flexible multibody systems. Int J Numer Eng 73:1518–1546

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Gerstmayr J, Dorninger A, Eder R, Gruber P, Reischl D, Saxinger M, Schörgenhumer M, Humer A, Nachbagauer K, Pechstein AS, Vetyukov Y (2013) Hotint—a script language based framework for the simulation of multibody dynamics systems. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2013 IDETC CIE conference, Portland, Oregon, USA

  41. Gerstmayr J, Holl HJ, Irschik H (2001) Developments of plasticity and damage in vibrating structural elements performing guided rigid-body motions. Arch Appl Mech 71:135–145

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Gerstmayr J, Irschik H (2001) The elasto-plastic pendulum with geometric stiffening. ZAMM, 81

  43. Gerstmayr J, Irschik H (2003) Vibrations of the elasto-plastic pendulum. Int J Non-Linear Mech 38:111–122

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Gerstmayr J, Irschik H (2008), On the appropriateness of the absolute nodal coordinate formulation for nonlinear problems of rods. In: Proceedings of the 4th European conference on structural, control (4ECSC), 1

  45. Gerstmayr J, Irschik H (2008) On the correct representation of bending and axial deformation in the absolute nodal coordinate formulation with an elastic line approach. J Sound Vib 318:461–487

    Google Scholar 

  46. Gerstmayr J, Irschik H (2011) A continuum-mechanics interpretation of Reissner’s non-linear shear-deformable beam theory. Math Comput Model Dyn Syst 17(1):19–29

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  47. Gerstmayr J, Matikainen MK (2006) Analysis of stress and strain in the absolute nodal coordinate formulation. Mech Based Des Struct Mach 34:409–430

    Google Scholar 

  48. Gerstmayr J, Matikainen MK, Mikkola AM (2008) A geometrically exact beam element based on the absolute nodal coordinate formulation. J Multibody Syst Dyn 20:359–384

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  49. Gerstmayr J, Schöberl J (2006) A 3D finite element method for flexible multibody systems. Multibody Syst Dyn 15:309– 324

  50. Gerstmayr J, Shabana AA (2006) Analysis of thin beams and cables using the absolute nodal coordinate formulation. Nonlinear Dyn 45(1–2):109–130

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. Gerstmayr J, Sugiyama H, Mikkola AM (2013) Review on the absolute nodal coordinate formulation for large deformation analysis of multibody systems. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn 8:031016. doi:10.1115/1.4023487

  52. Gruttmann F, Wagner W (2001) Shear correction factors in Timoshenko’s beam theory for arbitrary shaped cross-sections. J Comput Mech 27:199–207

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  53. Hibbeler RC (2006) Technische Mechanik 3, Dynamik. Pearson Education Deutschland GmbH, Munich

    Google Scholar 

  54. Hodges DH (2006) Nonlinear composite beam theory. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  55. HOTINT. Linz Center of Mechatronics GmbH, Johannes Kepler University Linz. http://www.hotint.org/. Accessed 01 Aug 2013

  56. Humer A, Reischl D, Gerstmayr J (2012) Investigations on the application of energy-momentum schemes to modally-reduced multibody systems. In: Eberhard P, Ziegler P (eds) Proceedings of the IMSD2012—The 2nd joint international conference on multibody system dynamics, May 29–June 1, 2012 Stuttgart, Germany

  57. Hurty WC (1965) Dynamic analysis of structural systems using component modes. AIAA J 3:678–685

    Google Scholar 

  58. Hussein BA, Weed D, Shabana AA (2009) Clamped end conditions and cross section deformation in the finite element absolute nodal coordinate formulation. Multibody Syst Dyn 21:375–393

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  59. Hussien HA, Sugiyama H, Shabana AA (2007) Coupled deformation modes in the large deformation finite-element analysis: problem definition. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn 2:146–154

    Google Scholar 

  60. Ibrahimbegović A (1995) On finite element implementation of geometrically nonlinear Reissner’s beam theory: three-dimensional curved beam elements. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 122:11–26

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  61. IFToMM. Technical Committee for Multibody Dynamics. http://iftomm-multibody.org. Accessed 10 Oct 2012

  62. Irschik H, Gerstmayr J (2009) A continuum mechanics based derivation of Reissner’s large-displacement finite-strain beam theory: the case of plane deformations of originally straight Bernoulli–Euler beams. Acta Mech 206:1–21

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  63. Irschik H, Gerstmayr J (2009) A hyperelastic Reissner-type model for non-linear shear deformable beams. In Troch I, Breitenecker F (eds) In: Proceedings of the Mathmod 09, 2009

  64. Jelenić G, Crisfield MA (1999) Geometrically exact 3D beam theory: implementation of a strain-invariant finite elements for statics and dynamics. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 171:141–171

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  65. Jung SP, Park TW, Chung WS (2011) Dynamic analysis of rubber-like material using absolute nodal coordinate formulation based on the non-linear constitutive law. Nonlinear Dyn 63:149–157

    Google Scholar 

  66. Kerkkänen KS, Sopanen JT, Mikkola AM (2005) A linear beam finite element based on the absolute nodal coordinate formulation. J Mech Des 127:621–630

    Google Scholar 

  67. Kurz T, Eberhard P, Henninger C, Schiehlen W (2010) From Neweul to Neweul-M\(^2\): symbolical equations of motion for multibody system analysis and synthesis. Multibody Syst Dyn 24:25–41

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  68. Love AEH (1944) A treatise on the mathematical theory of rlasticity. Dover, New York

    Google Scholar 

  69. Maqueda LG, Shabana AA (2007) Poisson modes and general nonlinear constitutive models in the large displacement analysis of beams. Multibody Syst Dyn 18:375–396

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  70. Matikainen MK, Dmitrochenko O, Mikkola AM (2010) Beam elements with trapezoidal cross section deformation modes based on the absolute nodal coordinate formulation. In: International conference of numerical analysis and applied mathematics, pp 19–25

  71. Matikainen MK, von Hertzen R, Mikkola AM, Gerstmayr J (2009) Elimination of high frequencies in the absolute nodal coordinate formulation. In: Proceedings of the Institution of mechanical engineers, Part K, Journal of Multi-body Dynamics, 2009

  72. MBDyn. Politecnico di Milano. http://www.aero.polimi.it/mbdyn/. Accessed 05 Aug 2012

  73. Mikkola AM, Shabana AA (2003) A non-incremental finite element procedure for the analysis of large deformations of plates and shells in mechanical system applications. Multibody Syst Dyn 9:283–309

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  74. Mohamed A-NA, Brown MA, Shabana AA (2010) Study of the ligament tension and cross-section deformation using nonlinear finite element/multibody system algorithms. Multibody Syst Dyn 23:227–248

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  75. Nachbagauer K (2013) Development of shear and cross section deformable beam finite elements applied to large deformation and dynamics problems. Trauner Verlag, Schriftenreihe der Johannes Kepler Universitt Linz, Reihe C, Band 68

  76. Nachbagauer K, Gerstmayr J (2013) Structural and continuum mechanics approaches for a 3D shear deformable ANCF beam finite element: application to buckling and nonlinear dynamic examples. Special Issue of the Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics on Flexible Multibody Dynamics (to appear)

  77. Nachbagauer K, Gruber P, Gerstmayr J (2013) Structural and continuum mechanics approaches for a 3D shear deformable ANCF beam finite element: Application to static and linearized dynamic examples. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn 8(2):021004

    Google Scholar 

  78. Nachbagauer K, Gruber P, Vetyukov Y, Gerstmayr J (2011) A spatial thin beam finite element based on the absolute nodal coordinate formulation without singularities. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2011 international design engineering technical conferences, computers and information in engineering conference, Washington, DC, USA, 2011

  79. Nachbagauer K, Pechstein AS, Irschik H, Gerstmayr J (2011) A new locking-free formulation for planar, shear deformable, linear and quadratic beam finite elements based on the absolute nodal coordinate formulation. Multibody Syst Dyn 26:245–263

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  80. Nachbagauer K, Zehetner C, Gerstmayr J (2011) Nonlinear finite element modelling of moving beam vibrations controlled by distributed actuators. Advanced dynamics and model-based control of structures and machines, Springer, Vienna, pp 167–174

  81. Neweul. Institut für Technische und Numerische Mechanik, Universität Stuttgart. http://www.itm.uni-stuttgart.de/research/neweul/. Accessed 05 Aug 2012

  82. Nikravesh PE, Chung I, Benedict RL (1983) Plastic hinge approach to vehicle crash simulation. Comput Struct 16:395–400

    Google Scholar 

  83. Ogden RW (1984) Non-linear elastic deformation. Dover, New York

    Google Scholar 

  84. Omar MA, Shabana AA (2001) A two-dimensional shear deformable beam for large rotation and deformation problems. J Sound Vib 243(3):565–576

    Google Scholar 

  85. Pai PF, Schulz MJ (1999) Shear correction factors and an energy-consistent beam theory. Int J Solids Struct 36:1523–1540

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  86. Pan W, Haug EJ (1999) Dynamic simulation of general flexible multibody systems. Mech Struct Mach 27:217–251

    Google Scholar 

  87. Parkus H (1988) Mechanik der festen Körper. Springer, Wien, New York

    Google Scholar 

  88. Pechstein AS, Reischl D, Gerstmayr J (2013) A generalized component mode synthesis approach for flexible multibody systems with a constant mass matrix. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn 8(1):11–19

    Google Scholar 

  89. RecurDyn. FunctionBay Inc. http://eng.functionbay.co.kr/. Accessed 05 Aug 2012

  90. Reissner E (1972) On one-dimensional finite-strain beam theory: the plane problem. J Appl Math Phys 23:795–804

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  91. RoboTran. Université Catholique de Louvain (ucl). www.robotran.be/. Accessed 05 Aug 2012

  92. Romero I (2008) A comparison of finite elements for nonlinear beams: the absolute nodal coordinate and geometrically exact formulations. Multibody Syst Dyn 20:51–68

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  93. Schiehlen W (1990) Multibody systems handbook. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  94. Schiehlen W (1997) Multibody system dynamics: roots and perspectives. Multibody Syst Dyn 1:149–188

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  95. Schiehlen W, Eberhard P (2012) Technische Dynamik, Rechnergestützte Modellierung mechanischer Systeme im Maschinen-und Fahrzeugbau, 3rd edn. Vieweg+Teubner Verlag, Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, Wiesbaden, Germany

  96. Schwab AL, Meijaard JP (2005) Comparison of three-dimensional flexible beam elements for dynamic analysis: finite element method and absolute nodal coordinate formulation. In International design engineering technical conferences, computers, and information in engineering conference, editors. In: Proceedings of IDETC/CIE 2005

  97. Schwab AL, Meijaard JP (2009) Beam benchmark problems for validation of flexible multibody dynamics codes. In Wojtyra M, Arczewski K, Fraczek J (eds) In: Proceedings of the multibody dynamics 2009 eccomas thematic conference, pp 1–13

  98. Schwab AL, Meijaard JP (2010) Comparison of three-dimensional flexible beam elements for dynamic analysis: classical finite element formulation and absolute nodal coordinate formulation. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn 5(1):1–10. Article 011010

  99. Schwarze M, Reese S (2009) A reduced integration solid-shell finite element based on the EAS and the ANS concept: geometrically linear problems. Int J Numer Methods Eng 80:1322–1355

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  100. Schwarze M, Reese S (2011) A reduced integration solid-shell finite element based on the EAS and the ANS concept: large deformation problems. Int J Numer Methods Eng 85:289–329

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  101. Shabana AA (1997) Definition of the slopes and the finite element absolute nodal coordinate formulation. Multibody Syst Dyn 1(3):339–348

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  102. Shabana AA (1998) Dynamics of multibody systems, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  103. Shabana AA (2005) Dynamics of multibody systems, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  104. Shabana AA, Hussien HA, Escalona JL (1998) Application of the absolute nodal coordinate formulation to large rotation and large deformation problems. J Mech Des 120:188–195

    Google Scholar 

  105. Shabana AA, Mikkola AM (2003) Use of the finite element absolute nodal coordinate formulation in modeling slope discontinuity. ASME J Mech Des 125:342–350

    Google Scholar 

  106. Shabana AA, Schwertassek R (1998) Equivalence of the floating frame of reference approach and finite element formulations. Int J Nonlinear Mech 33(3):417–432

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  107. Shabana AA, Yakoub RY (2001) Three dimensional absolute nodal coordinate formulation for beam elements: theory. ASME J Mech Des 123:606–613

    Google Scholar 

  108. Sherif K, Nachbagauer K (2013) A detailed derivation of the velocity-dependent inertia forces in the floating frame of reference formulation. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn. doi:10.1115/1.4026083

  109. Sherif K, Nachbagauer K (2013) On a straight forward implementation of the inertia forces in the FFRF by means of invariant matrices. Multibody Syst Dyn (submitted)

  110. Simo JC (1985) A finite strain beam formulation. The three-dimensional dynamic problem. Part I. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 49:55–70

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  111. Simo JC, Hughes TJ (1998) Computational inelasticity. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  112. Simo JC, Vu-Quoc L (1986) On the dynamics of flexible beams under large overall motions—the plane case: Part I and II. J Appl Math 53:849–863

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  113. Simo JC, Vu-Quoc L (1986) A three-dimensional finite-strain rod model. Part II: computational aspects. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 58:79–116

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  114. SIMPACK. Simpack AG, Friedrichshafener Straße 1, 82205 Gilching, Germany. www.simpack.com. Accessed 05 Aug 2012

  115. Sopanen JT, Mikkola AM (2003) Description of elastic forces in absolute nodal coordinate formulation. Nonlinear Dyn 34:53– 74

  116. Sopanen JT, Mikkola AM (2003) Studies on the stiffness properties of the absolute nodal coordinate formulation for three-dimensional beams. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2003 design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, Chicago, Illinois, USA, September 2–6, 2003

  117. Spacar. Laboratory of Mechanical Automation, University of Twente. http://www.utwente.nl/ctw/wa/software/spacar/2013/intro/. Accessed 05 Aug 2012

  118. Stangl M, Gerstmayr J, Irschik H (2007) A large deformation finite element for pipes conveying fluid based on the Absolute Nodal Coordinate Formulation. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2007 international design engineering technical conferences & computers and information in engineering conference IDETC/CIE 2007, September 4–7 2007, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, Paper No. DETC2007-34771

  119. Sugiyama H, Escalona JL, Shabana AA (2003) Formulation of three-dimensional joint constraints using the absolute nodal coordinates. Nonlinear Dyn 31:167–195

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  120. Sugiyama H, Escalona JL, Shabana AA (2003) Spatial joint constraints in flexible multibody systems using the absolute nodal coordinate formulation. In ASME 2003 design engineering technical conferences, computers, and information in engineering conference, editors, Proceedings of DETC’03

  121. Sugiyama H, Gerstmayr J, Shabana AA (2006) Deformation modes in the finite element absolute nodal coordinate formulation. J Sound Vib 298:1129–1149

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  122. Sugiyama H, Koyama H, Yamashita H (2010) Gradient deficient curved beam element using the absolute nodal coordinate formulation. J Comput Nonlinear Dyn 5:041001

    Google Scholar 

  123. Sugiyama H, Shabana AA (2004) Application of plasticity theory and absolute nodal coordinate formulation to flexible multibody system dynamics. ASME J Mech Des 126:478–487

    Google Scholar 

  124. Sugiyama H, Suda Y (2007) A curved beam element in the analysis of flexible multibody systems using the absolute nodal coordinates. In: Proceedings of IMechE, vol 221, pp 219–231

  125. Sugiyama H, Yamashita H (2011) Spatial joint constraints for the absolute nodal coordinate formulation using the non-generalized intermediate coordinates. Multibody Syst Dyn 26:15–36

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  126. Sze KY (2002) Three-dimensional continuum finite element models for plate/shell analysis. Prog Struct Eng Mater 4:400– 407

    Google Scholar 

  127. Timoshenko SP, Gere JM (1997) Mechanics of materials, 4th edn. PWS Publishing Company, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  128. Timoshenko SP, Goodier JN (1951) Theory of elasticity. McGraw-Hill Book, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  129. Treloar LRG (1958) Physics of rubber elasticity. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  130. Vetyukov Y, Eliseev VV (2010) Modeling of building frames as spatial rod structures with geometric and physical nonlinearities (in Russian). Comput Contin Mech 3(3):32–45

    Google Scholar 

  131. Veubeke BF (1972) A new variational principle for finite elastic displacements. Int J Eng Sci 10:745–763

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  132. Vohar B, Kegl M, Ren Z (2008) Implementation of an ANCF beam finite element for dynamic response optimization of elastic manipulators. Eng Optim 40:1137–1150

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  133. von Dombrowski S (1997) Modellierung von Balken bei grossen Verformungen für ein kraftreflektierendes Eingabegerät. Diploma thesis, University Stuttgart and DLR

  134. von Dombrowski S (2003) Analysis of large flexible body deformation in multibody systems using absolute coordinates. Multibody Syst Dyn 8:409–432

    Google Scholar 

  135. Wasfy TM, Noor AK (2003) Computational strategies for flexible multibody systems. Appl Mech Rev 56(6):553–613

    Google Scholar 

  136. Washizu K (1974) Variational methods in elasticity and plasticity, 2nd edn. Pergamon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  137. Weed D, Maqueda LG, Brown MA, Hussein BA, Shabana AA (2010) A new nonlinear multibody/finite element formulation for knee joint ligaments. Nonlinear Dyn 60:357–367

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  138. Wriggers P (2001) Nichtlineare finite-element-methoden. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  139. Yakoub RY, Shabana AA (2001) Three dimensional absolute nodal coordinate formulation for beam elements: implementation and applications. ASME J Mech Des 123:614–621

    Google Scholar 

  140. Yoo WS, Dmitrochenko O, Pogorelov DY (2005) Review of finite elements using absolute nodal coordinates for large-deformation problems and matching physical experiments. In: Proceedings of the ASME international DETC and CIE conference, vol 6, pp 1285–1294

  141. Yoo WS, Lee JH, Sohn SJ, Park JH, Pogorelov D, Dmitrochenko O (2004) Large deflection of a thin plate: computer simulation and experiments. Multibody Syst Dyn 11:185–208

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  142. Zander R, Ulbrich H (2006) Free planar motion of flexible beams in MBS—a comparison of models. Mech Based Des Struct Mach 34:365–387

    Google Scholar 

  143. Zienkiewicz OC, Taylor RL (2000) The finite element method fifth edition volume 1: the basis. Butterworth and Heinemann, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  144. Zienkiewicz OC, Taylor RL (2000) The finite element method, volume 2: solid mechanics. Butterworth and Heinemann, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  145. Zupan D, Saje M (2003) Finite-element formulation of geometrically exact three-dimensional beam theories based on interpolation of strain measures. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 192:5209–5248

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Karin Nachbagauer acknowledges support from the European Regional Development Fund and the government of Upper Austria via a Regio 13 project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karin Nachbagauer.

Appendix: Nonlinear Constitutive Laws

Appendix: Nonlinear Constitutive Laws

It has to be mentioned that most of the studies on nonlinear elements based on the ANCF in literature use linear constitutive laws. Regarding many applications in which geometric and material nonlinearities arise, elastic material models are not sufficient to represent the real problem accurately. For this reason, an extension of the material model is necessary in order to fulfill the requirements of current but also of future materials arising in engineering or research. See, e.g., [11, 19] for the formulations of elasticity, plasticity and viscoelasticity in continuum mechanics. Furthermore, see [83] for a discourse on nonlinear elasticity and [129] for a nonlinear constitutive model suitable for rubber-like materials.

There exist theoretical, but also application-driven approaches for different inelastic material models in literature, see [51] for an overview of the state of the art of developments in ANCF, not only regarding the definition of the elastic forces and kinematics of ANCF elements, but also for recent developments on material models. As an example of application-driven research in the field of elasto-plasticity in multibody systems, the simulation of vehicle crash-tests has to be mentioned due to its importance in everyday life, see e.g. [82]. In case of multibody systems described in the FFRF, Ambrosio and Nikravesh [2] introduced elasto-plasticity by means of the finite element method. The standard fully-parameterized ANCF element [107, 139] allows for a straightforward implementation of general nonlinear constitutive models in the formulation. In the case that a flexible body undergoes large rotations, but only small deformations, there exist developments on a linear visco-elastic constitutive material model for ANCF elements, see e.g. [33] or [34] in which the stress tensor is split into deviatoric and volumetric components. More general nonlinear material models for large strain problems are discussed in [83]. A general nonlinear constitutive model under the assumption of hyper-elasticity and isotropy for beams undergoing large displacements is described in [69]. There, three hyper-elasticity material models for structural elements are presented, which are based on a Neo-Hookean constitutive law for compressible and incompressible materials and a Mooney-Rivlin constitutive law for incompressible materials. Poisson modes coupling stretch and bending to cross section deformation are captured and therefore the presented material models are suitable for a wide range of physics and engineering applications, e.g., for analyzing the behavior of rubber-like materials. The Yeoh material model is used for the dynamic large deformation problem of rubber-like material, e.g., in [65]. In case of nonlinear material behavior, fatigue analysis and especially in plasticity problems, the accurate handling of stress components is essential. Sugiyama and Shabana [123] have shown the application of plasticity combined with the ANCF in flexible multibody systems using a Lagrangian plasticity formulation describing large elastic but only small plastic deformation. For large plastic strain problems, Simo and Hughes [111] presented a plasticity formulation which splits the displacement gradient into elastic and plastic components. Elasto-plasticity and a formulation for plasticity is described e.g. in [47], in which incremental strains are used to update the stress components in a correct manner. Nikravesh et al. [82] introduced a plastic material model for rigid multibody systems using plastic hinges. Gerstmayr et al. [41] discussed plasticity and damage of vibrating structures under guided rigid-body motions. A detailed investigation of elasto-plasticity for beams is presented in [42] investigating an elasto-plastic pendulum with geometric stiffening, which serves as a widely used benchmark problem in robotics. In [43], the influence of plasticity upon the vibrations and rotations of this latter mentioned pendulum is discussed.

1.1 Modeling of Biomechanical Materials

A consistent integration of non-linearly elastic constitutive laws in order to apply the ANCF for the modeling of biological materials is of great interest as well and is getting more and more important in research. Since nonlinear constitutive models can not be implemented in beam models based on the classical theories easily, the investigation of such models for biomechanical applications is not straightforward. The standard fully-parameterized ANCF element [107, 139] allows for the modeling of general nonlinear material models used for biological materials and is, e.g., applied to model the deformation of ligaments of knee joints in cyclic motion in [137]. In the latter formulation, a combination of a biomaterial model, an underlying cross section deformation and the clamping conditions between ligaments and bones during a large bending of the knee joint are discussed. The formulations and results of different clamped end conditions for a knee joint, as the partially clamped joint and the fully clamped joint, are compared in [58]. While the fully clamped joint can not reproduce cross section deformation, the partially clamped joint allows for cross section deformation. In [74], two different knee joint models are investigated for studying ligament dynamics. While the first model involves a linear Hookean material law and does not capture cross section deformations, the second model involves a Neo-Hookean material law and is able to capture more general deformation modes, as Poisson modes and cross section deformation modes as well. Again in [74], the dynamic coupling between ligament tension and cross section deformation is analyzed in a numerical example involving a large displacement finite element formulation based on the standard fully-parameterized ANCF element [107, 139]. The constitutive models in [69] can be applied for rubber-like materials and are also suitable for analysis of biological tissues, ligaments or muscles. The presented models in [69] are investigated in an eigenfrequency test for a cantilevered as well as a simply supported beam comparing first two bending frequencies, torsional and axial frequencies for the different nonlinear constitutive models, standard Hookean, elastic line approach and the analytical values. Furthermore, the examples of a stiff pendulum and a very flexible pendulum show the accuracy of the models and a simple tension test of a simply supported beam shows that using a linear material model instead of a nonlinear constitutive model leads to singular configurations.

Regarding the modeling of surgeries or movements of robotics, the understanding, simulation and guidance of very flexible components is of great interest, e.g., in aerospace and manufacturing applications. The modeling of a flexible pipe conveying fluid using a planar ANCF beam element is described in [118]. The latter model is used to optimize the dynamic response of a flexible manipulator in [132]. The vibration control of a similar flexible manipulator using piezo-electric actuators is discussed in Nachbagauer et al. [80].

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nachbagauer, K. State of the Art of ANCF Elements Regarding Geometric Description, Interpolation Strategies, Definition of Elastic Forces, Validation and the Locking Phenomenon in Comparison with Proposed Beam Finite Elements. Arch Computat Methods Eng 21, 293–319 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-014-9117-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-014-9117-9

Keywords

Navigation